LISTEN to BLACK MAN THINKIN’


Protect the Consequences of Resisting Arrest from Calls for ‘Change’

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Comments: 1 Comment
Published on: July 16, 2020

Busting the current police brutality myth, which beget the accompanying #DefundThePolice insanity, hinges upon the answers to these question:

  • Is it a societal imperative to arrest those accused of violating the law, so that they might answer allegations made against them?
  • Do those who frustrate that imperative commit a separate offense that society allows is judicable “in the field” – rather than in a court of law – and which can be immediately punishable by death?

The answer to those questions help determine the allowable limits of police use of force, informs the definition of “brutality”, and helps to demonstrate the level of funding law enforcement requires to introduce suspects to the criminal justice process.

No matter the angle from which I consider the questions, my conclusion does not vary:

Any society, whose order and security depends on members respecting its body of laws, must consider it imperative that those who resist arrest – to answer for alleged violations of law – be subject to extrajudicial consequences, should they continue to resist, up to and including death.

Consequently, law enforcement agencies must have the authority, the resources, and the public support to subdue criminal suspects and bring to the legal process to determine their guilt or innocence, provided they are willing to be surrender or be subdued. If suspects will do neither, the case for them remaining alive in American society is not strong.

Before I go further, I cite the example of Ms. Parker and Mr. Barrow, a.k.a. Bonnie and Clyde. The Depression Era crime couple were so feared for their skills, and homicidal persistence, in resisting arrest, that law enforcement killed them via ambush in May 1934. They were not that period’s only notorious criminals who were so treated.

The point: it has been long established, even before Bonnie and Clyde died in a car riddled with more than 100 rounds of ammunition, that those who would not go willingly to be examined by and judged under the law could be killed by those who enforce the law.

Yes, I know how that sounds and, before you heat the tar by which you would affix feathers to me, I would have your answer to the following question: what alternative recourse does society have against those who will not submit to the process of an examination of criminal allegations against them?

And, more germane to current political environment, would be the question: is there any cause for which society should remove law enforcement’s authority – the duty, ability, or the means – to deliver any alleged violator to that examination process – alive or dead – in accordance with the alleged violator’s demonstrated preference?

Consider another example: Eric Garner of New York City, who died at age 43 as a direct result of resisting arrest. The 6′ 3″, 350-lb. diabetic with heart problems was fatally arrested on July 17, 2014.

On that day, Garner was suspected of selling untaxed cigarettes, often a Class A misdemeanor in New York. The police did not create this law; society did, via the legislative processes of New York State. Of course, elected officials are seldom present to prevent or address the (unintended) consequences of their edicts; some ignore those consequences altogether. Nevertheless, the police are bound, by oath, to uphold, rather than to debate, the law.

Once confronted, Garner had a societal obligation to submit to arrest, so his guilt could be determined. It was an obligation he tried to avoid before; Garner had been arrested 30 times before by NYPD, including for resisting arrest.

On July 17, 2014, Garner not only denied his obligation, he told officers, “This ends today!” Faced with such defiance by an alleged criminal, what options were available to society and its law enforcers? Should police have:

  • Tried arresting Garner at a later time, when he was in a better mood?
  • Dropped the matter, gone away, and left Garner be?

Before answering, understand that society has no ability to secure themselves against lawless individuals, absent the ability to physically compel participation in the process to evaluate alleged crimes, at a time of society’s choosing. Therefore, no option, allowing Garner to decide when or if he would respond to the allegations, is acceptable in a society of laws, for then Garner’s prerogatives – apart from the law – would matter more than the rights of society governed by the law.

So again, what were society’s options when faced with Eric Garner’s refusal to be arrested?

For those who say he should have received due process, no one who does not submit to the legal process is due anything from it. By definition, those who resist arrest choose to be outside of the legal process and its protections, and remain in that position until they change their mind – or have it changed – and submit. Garner never changed his mind, never surrendered (The phrase “I can’t breathe!” is not the same as “I surrender!” and, as painful and difficult as it may be, if a person can talk, then they can breathe). Garner was not robbed of due process under the law; he chose not to be under the law where due process resides.

And a third time, what were society’s options when faced with Eric Garner’s refusal to be arrested? They were two:

  1. Not enforce the law, or
  2. Bring whatever pressure was needed to overcome Garner’s resistance.

If a living Garner would not yield, then – tragically – he risked death. It was Garner’s choice: either be taken to a precinct and be processed for a misdemeanor offense, or have a physical battle with police that he would not be allowed to win. To this day, his choice seems unreasonable to me, especially in light of the fact he was married with a family.

Let’s switch gears and consider the contrasting and less recent example of Eric Robert Rudolph, the 1996 Centennial Olympic Park, and abortion clinic, bomber who was apprehended in May of 2003. His alleged crimes included murders, more heinous transgressions than Garner’s, and his 7 years on the run showed him no more interested in answering for them than was Garner.

So why is Eric Rudolph serving a life sentence behind bars, while Eric Garner serves an eternal one beneath a headstone? While the thoughtless will cite differences in their race; two other differences are more explanatory:

  1. Garner confronted the cops who came for him; Roberts evaded capture for 7 years, and
  2. Garner violently resisted his arrest; Roberts was taken into custody without incident.

The same is true of Dylann Roof, who shot and killed 9 blacks in a South Carolina church on June 17, 2015. After fleeing the state, ostensibly to evade capture, he was arrested without incident the next day in North Carolina.

All three men – Garner, Rudolph, and Roof – were apprehended by police. The two who accepted their societal obligation to submit to arrest, then to be charged and examined, are alive today and answering for murder; the one who refused that same societal obligation is dead, because he would not answer for selling untaxed cigarettes.

Truth is, the moment of arrest creates the possibility of another crime – resisting arrest – separate from violations of which one is already suspected, more important for society to prevent or stop at any cost. Because a society who cannot, when necessary, compel members to join a process of legal examination can enforce no law and, of necessity, becomes a society of men. Therefore, resisting arrest threatens societal order and security in ways no other crime can.

To blunt that threat, it becomes imperative that societies value the ability to compel their members to join their legal processes more than they value the lives of members who refuse to join those processes.

This is why the current lies about police brutality are so dangerous: they degrade confidence in, and the morale of, law enforcement and increase the likelihood that those who commit crimes will avoid a process where they might be evaluated and judged in accordance with law:

In all 3 cities, #BlackLivesMatter was active, ensuring that everyone who resisted arrest was seen as a victim of police rather than an enemy of society.

It is also why #DefundThePolice will fail American society. Taking from police departments will only embolden criminals who see police lacking the numbers, resources, and subsequently the will to respond to lawlessness, and cities sending unarmed employees to address “nonviolent” issues. This will ensure more resist arrest opportunities as police officers will now rescue alternate “first responders” who before would not be on scene until after police had controlled the situation.

Lies regarding police brutality, and efforts to remove police funding, are calculated to lessen the likelihood that alleged criminals are arrested and brought to the legal process. They demoralize police and attack bonds of trust and empathy between police departments and their communities, by promoting the unlawful prerogatives of suspects over the lawful rights of society. This leads to communities with heightened criminality made even less safe through reduced police activity and resources.

The (“protesters’”) intended outcome? A more anarchical society – lawless and ungovernable – which cannot continue either as a collection of democracies or, more importantly, as a constitutional republic. This, and nothing short of this, is the “change” that is sought.

American law and order should have the UNQUALIFIED support of the American people. American law enforcement should have the QUALIFIED support of the American people, something they have long enjoyed. While no one believes the police are perfect or that they should have a free hand, they are American in their allegiances and, regarding pursuit of what benefits the American people, far more trustworthy – and worthy of funding – than #BlackLivesMatter.

Recent erosions of that qualified support should be repaired, and further attempts to erode it actively resisted, for it is more vital to the nation than preserving the life of anyone who’d rather not be “inconvenienced” by the process of answering allegations that they violated American law.

Might COVID-19 Rescue Atlanta From This POC Female? Nothing Else Has.

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics, Best of Site
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments: Comments Off
Published on: July 7, 2020

After Independence Weekend 2020, Atlanta is clearly a more dangerous place because of the reckless progressivism of Keisha Lance Bottoms, another in the line of liberal U.S. black females who use elected office to compromise public safety for the sake of their ideology.

You might recall how Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake had police stand down to give “protesters” free rein and others space to destroy in Baltmore in 2015, and the incompetent State’s Attorney, Marilyn Mosby, who, after vowing “justice for Freddie Gray, convicted no one and so discouraged Baltimore Police with her persecution that the city’s murder rate skyrocketed.

POC female office holders now have a record of disregard for public safety. Mayors like:

and prosecutors like

maintain adversarial relationships with their respective police departments, ignore crimes that hurt businesses and communities, and advocate more strongly for criminal leniency than for crime reduction. Keisha Lance Bottoms is now at the head of that class.

Bottoms entered office in 2018 with a police shortage. Though the Atlanta Police Department was authorized to have 2,039 sworn officers, it had as few as 1,650 officers available, nearly 20% less. Unsurprisingly, law enforcer shortfall didn’t help the city’s crime problems.

Two Keisha Lance Bottoms years later, Atlanta’s Police Department still has too few cops, and the ciity has too much crime. A department authorized for more than 2,000 sworn officers has but 1,770. And Atlanta struggles mightily under Bottoms when it comes to lawlessness:

  • Total Crime Rate is 111.15% above the national average,
  • Violent Crime Rate is 108.40% above the national average, and
  • A Murder Rate higher than all but 22 U.S. cities, nearly treble that for the State, and more than 3.5 times that of the nation.

Along the way, Bottoms made Atlanta a de facto Sanctuary City…and publicly lied about doing so to affluent white residents at a 2019 townhall meeting, while crime was spiking in their neighborhoods. That year got so rough for Bottoms that social media savaged her selection as Spelman College’s Commencement Speaker with a #NotKeisha hashtag.

And 2020 has not been kind to Atlanta, thanks in large part to the mayor.

When the Hypocritical Hashtag – #BlackLivesMatter – brought their “peaceful protests” to Atlanta, Bottoms said many “motherly” things, but did nothing to quell the violence. And when her understaffed police force acted aggressively to control what she had called chaos, instead of supporting them, she fired two officers and suspended three others – employing the standard Democrat (POC) female officeholder tactic of valuing the rights of (often transient) societal disruptors over those of citizens who make societies work.

Then came Rayshard Brooks, the probationer who, on May 24th told the world he knew his next transgression would send him directly to jail – without passing GO! or collecting $200. Despite that knowledge, Brooks showed up sloppy drunk, passed out behind the wheel at an Atlanta Wendy’s Drive-Thru on June 12th.

Officers called to the scene engaged Brooks for more than half an hour as the “happily married” man spoke of his daughter’s upcoming birthday, how his sister lived nearby, and of his girlfriend (not his wife) who was at the restaurant with him. The engagement took an unfortunate turn after Brooks failed a voluntary breathalyzer test.

Brooks resisted arrest, fighting the officers and stealing a taser before attempting to flee. When he pointed the stolen taser at the pursuing officers, he was shot and killed.

That was too much for Mayor Bottoms.

If, in the Mind of Keisha, tasing protesters who violated curfew and resisted arrest was excessive force, then fatally shooting a probationer who resisted arrest, stole a police weapon, and then turned that weapon on police officers must be murder. The officer who shot Brooks was fired and charged, apparently with everything not nailed to the floor in the District Attorney’s office.

And that was too much for Atlanta’s police officers.

In direct response to the charges, to the firings, to two years of the Mayor and City Hall showing how unserious they were about securing Atlanta against crime and disruption, or about supporting police officers, at least 8 officers resigned. At least, because the Atlanta Police Foundation had the number at 19 before the Atlanta Police Deparment “corrected” them, and others the Police Department could not influence put the number of police resignations at 70, and accusing city officials, including the mayor, of trying to minimize the issue. This is significant, because what the City wants to call a temporary job action might be more a permanent job search, as officers seek, not time away from their jobs, but new jobs away from a toxic work environment.

For her part, Bottoms acknowledged that poice morale was low, though accepted no responsibility for why it was “down ten-fold”. She went on to speak of how she expected officers to “keep their commitment to our communities” without mentioning how she had spent more than two years showing no commitment to the Police Department, or to controlling crime.

And, channeling her inner Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and Jenny Durkan personas, Bottoms gave a portion of her city, the area where Rayshard Brooks was shot, over to the destructive safe-keeping of #BlackLivesMatter. What could go wrong?

Well there’s this: in the 2015 Baltimore tradition, criminal violence in Atlanta increased in proportion to the increase in persecution of police officers, culminating in the 2020 Atlanta Independence Day Massacre, a July 4th that saw more than one person per hour shot; in the Seattle 2020 tradition, where #BlackLivesMatter is responsible for 4 shootings in 9 days, which wounded 4 and killed…wait for it…two black males, they blew way an 8-year-old black girl in the area Bottoms surrendered to the Hypocritical Hastage.

That’s what could – and did – go wrong and, yes, this is on Keisha Lance Bottoms.

Concluding Atlanta’s mayor to be a public safety incompetent, Georgia’s governor called up the National Guard, which have arrived in Georgia’s capitol. Bottoms complaint about the call up? That the governor had not sent face masks:

“The irony of that is I asked Gov. Kemp to allow us to mandate masks in Atlanta and he said no. But he has called in the National Guard without asking if we needed the National Guard.”

Bottoms believes getting facemasks to address a virus she did not need to control were more important thangetting the manpower to address violence she had failed to control. Just another glimpse into the Mind of Keisha.

Bottoms went on to tell ABC’s “Good Morning America” how she believed COVID-19 was a major contributor to the violence, not only in Atlanta, but throughout the country. You can’t make this up. Which brings us to the only positive thing for Atlanta to come of this sorry spectacle: Bottoms has tested positive for the COVID-19 virus.

Why is that positive, one may ask? First she’s unlikely to die; the death rate keeps falling like a polished safe, now at half a percent and heading lower.

It is positive because, if dealing with the virus takes any part of her attention OFF running the city of Atlanta, then someone might “sneak in” and give it the attention to public safety and leadership against crime that black females in elected office virtually never do.

All Americans Should Despise #BlackLivesMatter

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics, Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments: Comments Off
Published on: August 2, 2020

The Hypocritical Hashtag continues to ride police brutality lies toward an anarchy destination intended to diminish all in America. They taunt toward widespread armed conflict, and Americans will have to fight them – one way or another – to end the current tensions. No “diplomatic solutions” exist that would allow the republic to continue.

I’ll not revisit the 2013 “Trayvon Martin was murdered” discussion, which involved no police officers; an all-female jury in Florida exploded that myth, except to mention that, even though “protests” of the thuggish teen’s death went international, #BlackLivesMatter and their supporters took an “L” in that case.

Because the black lesbian-run organization cannot accomplish their objectives by exploiting disputes between regular citizens. They desire to weaken American governability and, therefore, require disputes that call American governance into question, no matter what a court might decide. Civilian disputes do not accomplish that; however, incidents involving police use of force do.

The next year, Eric Garner, a black veteran of 30 prior arrests by NYPD, chose to resist his 31st arrest, a foolish decision that cost him his life. Also in 2014, Michael Brown, a black strong arm felon in Ferguson, MO, who assaulted a cop in a separate incident and tried to take to take the officer’s gun; Brown was blown away for his trouble. With these deaths, #BlackLivesMatter had struck gold, and they championed both deceased criminals:

In 2015, #BlackLivesMatter:

In 2016 #BlackLivesMatter:

The pattern is readily discernible.

Interestingly, all this – and more – occurred on Obama’s watch; it was a recurring theme during his final term. One wonders where the nation would be now had Mrs. “Blacks are Super-Predators Who Must Be Brought To Heel” Clinton prevailed in 2016, whether she would have poured oil on troubled waters, or poured troubled water on existing grease fires?

Of course, we can never know that answer. More importantly, it likely doesn’t matter; #BlackLivesMatter’s pursuit of their agenda was not dependent upon who ascended to the U.S. Presidency in 2016.

#BlackLivesMatter wants to assassinate American governance by: attacking law enforcement’s legal and moral authority; championing the cause of sketchy blacks who die from interacting with law enforcement; needlessly destroying lives and property in reatlation for those deaths, and then leaving black fingerprints prominently displayed at their mayhem scenes.

This effectively reduces blacks to Lee Harvey Oswald-style patsy’s, seen as angry, weak, and useful idiots. And black who support the Hypocritical Hastag play the patsy role well:

  • Practicing victimology and affirming the false premise of police brutality,
  • Marching & destroying in support of dead blacks with whom they’d likely not share a meal were they alive, and
  • Denying black culpability for the state of relations between them and law enforcement

These same blacks appear even more the patsy as all learn their questionable cause, already hijacked by foreign globalists, has been taken over by young non-black socialists, desiring to end the West; as few as 1 in 6 #BlackLivesMatter protesters are actually black. Yet blacks will likely take the blame for any damage done to the country, as they seem unable or unwilling to distance themselves from either the name of the movement, even as city after city is impacted by the widening madness.

And, while the black patsy’s divert public scrutiny, the Hypocritical Hashtag gathers money from corporations and globalists to distribute to non-black progressives and socialists, especially those seeking (re-) election to public office.

And those officeholders are faithful to the Hypocritical Hashtag’s “Destroy America, Blame Blacks” objective, with Minneapolis’ City Council President referring to the desire to be secure in one’s home at night as a “privilege” to which taxpayers are not entitled. However, she neglected to tell CNN why it was appropriate for taxpayers to provide city councilmembers the privilege of private security while going without the “privilege” of public policing.

Meanwhile, the vanishing Minneapolis Police Department has issued guidance to citizens on how to be safe as robberies and carjackings increase in the city: obey the criminals. No mention of any police presence or that they will respond to calls for help. The logical short-term outcome: more dead and injured in that city as citizens fight crime on their own. And you can expect the same to occur in other Democrat-run municipalities, especially where left-leaning (POC) females have any governmental authority.

BlackLivesMatter efforts against American governance and American Law & Order should be hated, despised, and terminated – with extreme prejudice. They have one goal: to destroy America’s Constitutional Republic. If you continue to allow them to masquerade as “protesters”, instead of regarding them as domestic constitutional enemies, they could succeed.

With regard to blacks and others sympathetic to the Hypocritical Hashtag, Americans of all stripes will be forced to weigh concerns for their “issues” against the welfare of the nation. They may gain a new understanding of President Lincoln’s words to Horace Greeley. What follows is a paraphrase which may represent an American consensus:

I would save the Republic. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Republic will be “the Republic as it was.” If there be those who would not save the Republic, unless they could at the same time save #BlackLivesMatter, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Republic unless they could at the same time destroy #BlackLivesMatter, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Republic, and is not either to save or to destroy #BlackLivesMatter. If I could save the Republic without heeding any #BlackLivesMatter concerns I would do it, and if I could save it by hearing all #BlackLivesMatter issues I would do it; and if I could save it by hearing some and ignoring others I would also do that. What I do about #BlackLivesMatter, and their supporters, I do because I believe it helps to save the Republic; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Republic. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause.

As slavery was not the paramount issue in 1862, neither can #BlackLivesMatter’s version of police brutality be the paramount issue in 2020. The Hypocritical Hashtag is no less subversive and seditious today than slaving Confederates were in the 19th century. They should be similarly treated and despised because, now as then, only #TheRepublicMatters – other concerns are unimportant.

But You Say, “It’s not a Hoax”?

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics, Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comments: Comments Off
Published on: April 5, 2020
Interesting how the numbers have increased since March 24, 2020, isn’t it?

The above chart is both disturbing and significant in understanding what the federal government is (purposely) doing to the American people, their electorate, and their economy.

It shows the result of an added log on the COVID-19 hysteria bonfire, intended to keep Americans from acting like, well, Americans for as long as possible, in hopes that the current president might be removed and the march toward globalism might resume.

March 24, 2020, could, in the words of FDR, be “a date which will live in infamy”, provided the American people treat the domestic government who opposes them as they did a foreign nation who attacked them.

For on March 24, 2020, the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) sent guidance for those involved in reporting causes of death in the U.S., regarding how to accurately capture mortality data for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) on death certificates:

  • A new International Classification of Diseases (ICD) Code, U07.1 would be used for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) ,
  • Code U07.1 to appear if COVID-19 caused “or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death”; a confirmed positive test is not required,
  • Code U07.1 to appear if death certificate reports “probable COVID-19” or “likely COVID-19”,
  • The expectation is COVID19 will be listed as the underlying cause more often than not, and
  • The new code, along with the recommended listings, were to be used immediately.

Translation: the federal government’s message to those who create death certificates:

  • We need ‘RONA numbers, y’all!
  • If it’s close, then it’s the virus!
  • When in doubt, ‘RONA took ’em out! 

And the very next day: “Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a new ‘RONA daily death record! 223!”

A week later, as my late grandfather would say, to the death certifiers, “Now, you cookin’ with GAS!” Another Record ‘RONA Report, on April Fools Day – how apropos – 865! But we were just warming up. The next day, another ‘RONA Record – 1,106 dead.

Now, look again at the image atop this post. Is this coming into focus for you yet? Isn’t it an interesting coincidence how the exponential – and frightening – increase in reported COVID-19 deaths occurs immediately after death certifiers were told to list COVID-19 on more death certificates?

A quote often attributed to Josef Stalin reads: “It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.” Well, it would appear there is now a public health scare corollary:

“It is enough that the people know there were deaths. The people who die determine nothing. The people who say how they died determine everything.”

Remember, experts predicted deaths would peak by mid-April, That could be as much – or more – the result of data manipulation than data modeling.

Now that the federal government is artificially increasing the number of reported COVID-19 deaths, what might that mean to the “flattening the curve” rhetoric of Dr. Anthony “Doc L’il Bit” Fauci and others?

Flattening the curve is not about minimizing the number of those who die from a disease outbreak, neither is it done to shorten the duration of the outbreak; flattening the curve is about not allowing the number of active cases to exceed available healthcare resources (hospital beds, medicines, etc.). Compared to the disease running its natural course, it is entirely possible – even likely – that flattening its curve will result in more infections…and more deaths…and over a longer period of time.

This is especially true when “flat curve advocates” acknowledge failure to control the outbreak at all. So, COVID-19 death tolls are being “adjusted” upward and – consequently? – the curve is far from flattening. So what is going on?

How about the hospital overcrowding about which the Trump administration warned the nation and for which some states are preparing? That should generate more questions than panic.

The CDC estimates, during the current and ongoing flu season, between 400,000 and 730,000 have been hospitalized; there have been no reports of overcrowded hospitals, as there were in 2018. Did hospitals increase their capacity so they could better respond to a bad flu season? If not, then this years’ hospitalizations should have caused the same reports as 2 years ago. If adjustments were made, then why are the relatively few COVID-19 cases creating an overcrowded situation?

Then there are the state and local shutdowns. While it is not uncommon for a bad flu season to cause school closures or cancel events, as occurred in 2018, it is strange, at the least to shut down major cities in America, and entire states. As a result, businesses are involuntarily shuttered, workers forced into idleness, government decides whose activities are essential and, perhaps most egregious, government is now regulating worship in America, a nation, in part, founded upon the notion that government would be forbidden to do any such thing.

And Americans, normally revered for their bravado and courage, are now encouraged to abandon those attributes and instead hide in their homes, where money hoard toilet paper and basic foods. Consequently, the U.S. has gone from a nation that’s not seen recession in a decade to one that braces for the economic version of the zombie apocalypse.

All because of a virus, whose medical impact pales in comparison to that of 5 other viral threats to human beings – including the flu – and, if the American medical bureaucracy would stop lying about the number of COVID-19 deaths, would likely be regarded is what it is – a lesser threat than, well, the flu.

This now paralyzing fear has been relentlessly encouraged by the American press, a disingenuous bureaucrat in Fauci, who preaches tests and distancing, and whose opposition to hydroxylchloroquine is being ignored at hospitals such as Johns Hopkins, UCLA Medical Center, and Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital, by doctors who actually treat patients.

The damage from the fear that has encouraged government overreach is already extensive:

  • Millions of lost jobs, here and around the world,
  • Loss of community, as Americans avoid each other to “save lives”, and
  • A massive and deceptive raid on the US Treasury.

The recently signed Stimulus Package was reported as an obscene $2.2 Trillion piece of legislation. Why was it obscene? The $787 Billion Obama Stimulus:

Well, if $787 Billion to $831 Billion of stimulus could wreak that much havoc, what might more than 2 and 1/2 times that amount do to the American economy…

And then the nation learned, as the president signed the package into law, that only a third of the story had been told:

Through fake news, manufactured fear, bureaucratic lying, and political sleight-of-hand, the Deep State, once considered limited to the Intelligence and Foreign Affairs communities, have made cowards of the American people, damaged their livelihoods, and stole their Treasure. They did promise to tip the people for their jelly-back cooperation…eventually.

So, after 5 years of attacking Donald Trump to get to the American people – regarding things which shamed him not and about which the people did not care, the country’s political and ideological left took dead aim at the American people, using a minor virus to create a a serious crisis…then not letting it go to waste.

The goal is to humble America, to have her surrender her exceptionalism, and her positions of leadership in the world, and make history’s greatest nation neither better nor different than on any other. Simply put, it is easier to subdue all of the nations if the American nation no longer leads them.

Fortunately, the American capitulation is not complete. People are growing less comfortable with arbitrary government restrictions. Experts and government officials are walking away from the high death projections. And, as cold and flu season winds down, COVID-19, like SARS before it, and as the flu does every year, will go dormant.

So, time for progressives and leftists to break the American will is now a race against warmer temperatures. It will require generating a ridiculous number of b.s. COVID-19 deaths, backed up by visible carnage Americans see in their communities, in a very short period of time.

Also working against the effort to break American resolve: the creeping acceptance, among the public and, more importantly, among medical practitioners, here and abroad, that what this unlikely-looking hero says is true.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaSHM1TK5tM

Watching Melanin Fall…

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics, Best of Site
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Comments: 7 Comments
Published on: January 19, 2020

To the extent this is credible – Oh, how the American black mind calcifies!

Blacks are pessimistic about, and choose to consider racist, an elected official who’s presided over:

Interestingly, Trump’s thinking and behavior toward blacks is virtually unchanged from what it had been before he sought the presidency, which represents a time when he was acknowledged for a “lifetime of service to African Americans” by one Jesse Louis Jackson. In an existence more public than most, Trump endured failed companies, failed marriages, ridicule, bankruptcies, and was called many things; however, ‘racist’ was not among them.

(I’m aware of the federal housing discrimination lawsuit; no one has shown that he did anything more than seek not to lease apartments to those he believed were unlikely to pay rent…and he wrote in one of his books,  “What we didn’t do was rent to welfare cases, white or black”.

I’m also aware of Trump’s stance regarding the Central Park Five…and I don’t care. Trump didn’t produce the case against them; NYPD and the District Attorney’s office did. Nor has anyone shown he might have acted differently had the perceived perpetrators not been black. Trump has mad love for NYC for many reasons, including business, and that crime was an assault on ‘his’ city.)

Donald John Trump is an out-sized personality who has supported blacks for decades, and that behavior continued after his unexpected ascent to the presidency. Trump hasn’t changed; however black perception of Trump has, and that change is more likely to condemn blacks than condemn the president, in the eyes of the nation and her electorate.

Begin with the poll finding blacks the most racist U.S. demographic, even in the minds of blacks.

Then consider public positions that blacks take which at least appear unreasonable:

Such hypocritical and nonsensical rhetoric damage black credibility. Couple that with disproportionately high illegitimacy, abortion, criminality, and STD infection rates, and it becomes reasonable to wonder about the current humanity of a people who just 6 decades ago led the nation on a moral crusade against inhumanity.

Blacks, as a group, are marginalizing themselves, with an especially virulent strain of  TDS that renders those affected all but incapable of rational thought or conversation where the president is concerned, that renders them deaf to anyone who’s not a progressive member of the Democrat Party, or a progressive agent of the mainstream (or left-wing) media. Other whites who attempt to engage them are labeled racists exercising white privilege; blacks who deign to approach are labeled “coons” or other pejorative terms.

This would not be a testimony against blacks were they not faring measurably better under Trump than than they fared under his predecessor. Blacks show less regard for a white president who serves them well, than for a black one who made them at best a third priority, behind homosexuals and illegal immigrants. And the country saw and took note of the obvious racism and lack of logic.

Consequently whites, Latinos, and Asians are becoming less likely to engage with blacks on issues that impact the country at large…because blacks reduce the areas  of objective American commonality between themselves and other citizens. Even Jews, longtime allies with blacks on political and social issues, are re-evaluating their relationships with blacks, in the wake of rising – and violent – anti-Semitism from members of the black community.

Meaning blacks, through every fault of their own, will see their part in the national conversation decrease. While there remains a call for national unity, many blacks opt to be the ice block in the Great American Melting Pot – critical of the good economy, critical of not being at war, critical of the military, (hypo-) critical toward God, critical of anyone or anything that runs counter to what they espouse.

And what far too many blacks accept, without claiming to so do, represents a cultural posture that cannot help them…or anyone else:

Many born-in-America blacks have chosen a backward-looking mindset that prevents fully benefiting from what their country offers; instead of opening their hands to America’s current and future opportunities, they would rather shake a clenched fist at America’s past,  detaching themselves from Americanism and making themselves adversaries – if not enemies – of the state. That is a ruinous prescription for every black person inclined to get it filled. and that is what currently destroys black influence – political, social, and cultural – in America.

Fortunately, a small but increasing number of blacks want a new drug.

The temptation, fed by the media, is to see black support for Trump as an embrace of the president himself. It is likely not that; it stems from a realization that the political path for blacks need not be charted by those who are false friends to them, and who hate the country itself.

The number of blacks who will side with America will not eclipse the number whom Malcolm Little described as “political chumps and traitors to their race” anytime soon. But it would be un-American (and ungodly) not to hope, fervently, that it one day will. Just as abolitionists held out hope for decades that enough would agree with them so chattel slavery would end. Just as many hoped, for nearly a century following Reconstruction, for  laws encoding segregation into American society to fall. In both those cases, holding out hope was warranted though, at the time, it may have seemed pointless.

My thought is that hope will prove warranted in this instance as well, that the majority of blacks will embrace the political and ideological postures that underpin American confidence and success, and I believe they will. However, until that change occurs, America will continue to witness a decline in the fortunes of her black population; a decline which the nation will find painful to observe, but one that it cannot stop…because it’s a Black thing.

America Finally Won An Election

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics
Tags: , , , , ,
Comments: Comments Off
Published on: November 12, 2016

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdoLcdMJBUY[/youtube]
The nation was told not to expect this.

From the moment Americans found a 2016 presidential candidate through whom they could speak, they were called racist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, misogynistic, or all of the above…

Oh, you thought those were representations of Donald Trump? You poor soul.

Virtually every event, good or bad, of Trump’s adult life appeared in one or more sections of the New York Times; in that more than four decades, the Times and other media outlets put no nasty labels on Trump. It wasn’t until this, his second presidential run – after multiple fits and starts, that the press determined to supplement his name with colorful adjectives, and it did not take long…

When the press and his opponents believed Trump unserious, he was merely an entertainer out of his depth. When he got off to an underwhelming start in the primaries, he was a joke, a flash in the pan. But when it became apparent that his popularity was durable, that it was not based on political party or ideology, and that the press did not control him, that’s when the nasty names came out.

Trump did not carry the press’ and political elites’ well-massaged messages – biased special interest concerns, backed by deceptive opinion polling – to Americans; he brought an uncompromising and politically incorrect American message to them. He spoke to the despised press and the detested political elites the way many Americans speak of them in their homes or with friends. Consequently, their response to Trump’s open abuse of them – the condescension, the name-calling – was not directed at Trump; it came through Trump…aimed at the American people.

They were dissin’ Trump, but they were gunnin’ for you.

The press’ and the political establishment’s prolonged thermonuclear attack on Donald Trump was enough to make Hiroshima look like a bottle-rocket, yet it was not enough to separate the American people – you – from supporting someone who spoke, not as a Democrat or a Republican, not as a liberal or a conservative, and neither as a special interest group advocate, but as an American man giving voice to what Americans have consistently throughout the Obama years, and even longer: “the country is on the wrong track – and you guys in the press and in D.C. won’t tell the truth about why and, more importantly, won’t do a thing about what we know is wrong.”

Americans knew sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants were wrong-headed since Los Angeles implemented Special Order 40 in 1979, forbidding its police department from seeking to determine anyone’s immigration status, or arresting or booking anyone for violations of U.S. immigration law. Despite that knowledge, the number of U.S. sanctuary cities grew to more than 300, illegal immigrants became more and disproportionately criminal, press reporting sympathized with the “plight” of alien criminals than with their citizen victims, and the American government refused to act on behalf of the American people.

Americans knew the “giant sucking sound” of which Ross Perot spoke, during the 1992 presidential campaign, became a painful reality after Bill Clinton signed NAFTA into law the following year. They knew of the manufacturing jobs that had left the country. And they knew the Trans Pacific Partnership would make matters worse. Despite this, the mainstream press said little about the deal, and Barack Obama praised the agreement, despite strong trade union opposition.

Americans knew race relations were not how the black and brown race-baiters portrayed them; after all, a racist country could not elect, and then RE-ELECT, elect Barack Obama. In fact, Obama received most of his votes – both times – from whites. Despite that, America learned that Obama and his wife harbor racial animosity. They learned that only #BlackLivesMatter, and that to say otherwise, was a societal and political sin. In spite of this emotional bullying, Americans also recognized that black self-genocide – in U.S. streets and at abortion “clinics” – occurs at rates that make the efforts Ku Klux Klan and the Nazis – COMBINED – almost forgettable.

Americans know the U.S. financial and economic outlook is horrific. They know the national debt has doubled since Obama took office, but some in the press deceitfully say Obama has cut the national debt. Americans know that more than 100 million working-age Americans do not have jobs, but some in the press parrot the administration’s deceptive messages on unemployment without scrutinizing the numbers. They know that the economy has not grown even 3% per year in the last decade, an unprecedented occurrence in American history, yet members of the press repeated Obama’s claims of a strong economy and record growth. Americans know the record stock market levels do not indicate economic strength. Nevertheless, media members were all too pleased to tout market price levels to the millions receiving no benefit from rising financial markets.

Americans know that Obamacare is a trainwreck within a grease fire. They know Obama lied about the ability to keeping your current doctor and health insurance plan, about family health insurance cost savings. They know claims that Obamacare helps the economy are false. Yet, the press continues to tout the benefits for the few, at the expense of the many.

Political elites and the press spent the 2016 campaign, and the entire Obama administration, telling Americans that opposing the progressive agenda of Obama and the left was “deplorable” behavior, then offering a left-handed apology for a right-handed pimp slap. They told Americans that any unwillingness to accept (illegal) immigrants is hateful; that reluctance to embrace North African refugees is Islamophobia, even though Muslim terrorists travel with them, wreaking havoc throughout Western Europe; that rejecting black hypocrisy was racist, and wanting a sealed southern border was xenophobic; that a doubled national debt and record joblessness was not a problem…

In response, Americans lied to pollsters, voted with their feet at political rallies – despite being attacked for their candidate preference – and gave themselves a decisive Electoral College victory for Donald Trump to claim on their behalf.

Trump’s election astounded House Speaker Paul Ryan:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OITwX2Sp9vo[/youtube]
And Paul Ryan was wrong. Donald Trump did not hear a voice in the country that no one else heard; after all, more than 60 million people voted for Trump. He chose to hear and voice the American people’s concerns, rather than share D.C. Republican values:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeUzmWDi72A[/youtube]
…the same values which betrayed the will of the electorate in both 2010 and 2014.

Finally, Americans were told their choice for president could never be, by:
• The press,
• Former and Current Elected Republicans,
• The outgoing president…

Obama even mocked the idea that the poeple’s choice would occupy the office they desired for him:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvgnOqcCYCM[/youtube]
Nevertheless, after getting lying lips in 1988, an impeached president in 1996, Supreme Court confusion in 2000, and the no contests of 2008 & 2012, the America nation won a general election, and did so in the person of Donald J. Trump…

Mr. Obama might want to pick up that smartphone.

[contact-form subject='[Black Man Thinkin%26#039;’][contact-field label=’Name’ type=’name’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Email’ type=’email’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Website’ type=’url’/][contact-field label=’Comment’ type=’textarea’ required=’1’/][/contact-form]

Need to Drain the “Christian” Swamp. Election Time’s as Good As Any

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics
Tags: , , , , , , ,
Comments: Comments Off
Published on: October 22, 2016

It is possible that the “No Christian should vote” movement, regarding either major party candidate in 2016 is primarily a social media phenomenon However, I have reviewed enough articles and had enough personal conversations to doubt that.

It is almost certain that anyone with even a remote church affiliation has heard the “ain’t neither of ’em godly” refrain, or the “I was supporting Cruz, but now that y’all rejected him…” mantra, or the “We don’t need to worry; God is in control” chant to justify not voting for either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump next month.

Frankly, this is silly and one has to wonder, since very few who so speak are likely to do anything, between now and Thanksgiving, that is more significant about improving the state of the nation than step into a voting booth: what are these “faithful” folks thinking? While they may believe they are preparing the nation for a Holy Ghost “told you so”, after November 8th, they look more like the “sorry” kid no one picked for the sandlot game, who now wants to take his ball and bat and go home.

In other words, it seems like a power play…waged by those who in fact have no power. It is time for Christians to face facts.

The church in America is impotent in the nation’s public square, has been for more than a half century, supplanted by those who believe God should be absent from public policy discourse, those seeking “acceptable” homosexuality and other perversions, those who believe American compassion requires the surrender of American sovereignty, and those who desire unfettered slaughter of the nation’s next generation when they are most vulnerable. The American church is a marginal actor in American public life.

That the church should find itself so marginalized is odd for a few reasons, including:

    • Pilgrims settled on the continent for the free practice of Christianity and, without it, the people lacked sufficient moral resolve even to form a nation,
    • The teachings of Christianity form the underpinnings of America’s Constitution and legal system, and
    • Those who claim Christianity outnumber America’s atheists, homosexual apologists, compassionate globalists, and abortionists.

Despite this, instead of reasserting the Christian perspective and leading the national narratives, the church stands on the national sidelines, wringing its hands over policies it will not uniformly nor effectively oppose, and railing against electoral choices that it doesn’t support, while rallying to no viable alternatives. So, America’s Christian church, instead of casting doctrine to all from the national stage, lobs rotten tomatoes from the nation’s peanut gallery at policies that offend its sensitivities and its God; the church has ceded its power to change anything, with little sign that it seeks to reclaim its leadership mantle.

If the church will not vote, and it is apparent that it lacks the temerity to take up arms, as it once did against an English king, as it did against slavery, as it did against segregation (though those weapons were not carnal), then what good is it? It is become the salt that has lost its savor, lacking the courage or power to protect the unborn from wanton slaughter, or its own ability to worship as it sees fit. Yet American Christians are unwilling to stand united against Hillary Clinton?

Despite her disdain for Catholics:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qq-yrZB-Feo[/youtube]

Despite her disregard for Christian beliefs regarding abortion:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N34b43UNuCg[/youtube]

Despite her desire to subjugate Christian doctrine and elevate the homosexual agenda:
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0J6NTlDu6I[/youtube]

There is simply no courage, and therefore no spiritual power, in the American Christian church at large.

Had the 18th century church been dominated by the toothless, yapping chihuahua spirit of the modern American church, then the national anthem might yet be, ‘God Save the Queen’. Had the 19th century church been the same hand-wringing chatterboxes we see today, then chattel slavery would have ended via some man’s reversible whim, rather than by the cleansing and compelling dictate of shed blood. Had the 20th century church not overcome the double-minded among its ranks, then ‘separate but equal’ would still prevail in the land as a legal construct; however, church weakness, during that same century, resulted in the dismissal of God from the nation’s schools, and in the American womb being the place in which the overwhelming majority of the nation’s homicides occur. Yet, from that time to this, Christians in America yet claim access, both to God’s power and to His favor. However, such a claim by today’s church lacks the credibility to which the church of earlier times might be given.

For the church would NEVER sacrifice the American nation on an altar of ineffectual dictates and sanctimony, any more than it would withhold the gospel from a whoremonger or a corrupt financier. Yet this modern collection of the “faithful”, that claims relationship with God and His Christ in THIS country, often makes water seem like strong drink.

If the church today does not comprehend why the American nation, as described by its 240-year-old founding document, should be maintained, at virtually all cost, then it doesn’t…

If it cannot understand that Clinton should not, by any means, occupy the nation’s highest elected office, then it can’t…

But if it is now so lost in its understanding, to go along with its inability to shape the national conversation – when it was that very conversation regarding Christ which led to the nation’s founding – it has lost touch with the importance of this nation in the world and of the deep ties between America and the Christian God. Its members should renounce their U.S. citizenship and remove the ‘reserved’ sign from their seats in the pews: it is a waste that they should have either.

Fortunately, there is always room at the Cross, for new member of the faithful – those bolder in their Christianity, as well as in their Americanism.

And Then There Was…A Problem for the Parties

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics
Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Comments: 3 Comments
Published on: May 8, 2016

A picture of America’s modern presidential campaign model. Candidates seek to:

    • Segment the electorate into as many groups as practical, particularly at the state level,
    • Empathize with sympathetic groups to create the illusion of a supportive coalition,
    • Ignore conflicting interests within their coalition, speaking only of common goals,
    • Hurry to the primary/caucus before tensions in the coalition become unmanageable,
    • Repeat, in each state, adding/deleting groups as necessary to secure enough delegates,
    • Discard nationally unappealing or “extreme” groups at the convention, and
    • Craft a party message that:

      – Slights true believers,
      – Dupes fence-sitters,
      – Placates the disaffected, and
      – Appeals to voters not in the party.

Call it a “Divide, Destroy, then Cobble Together” strategy, a key feature of which is, no matter the general election result, the nominee has a reasonable answer for those offended by his campaign positions: “Compromise”.

Winners laud compromise positions, even dishonest ones, as a key to victory, reminding tweaked supporters that winning is more important than “getting everything our way”. Victory soothes wounded supporters with ignored interests, and winning serves to keep all party supporters in line for the next run.

Losers curse compromise positions for their defeat. Instead of cooling supporter anger, they flagellate themselves for not listening to their “base”, and pledge greater ideological purity in future campaigns if supporters will “hang in there” with them.

And, no matter which “compromise” justification they receive, voters return to their places and further segment themselves, with each group seeking golden tickets – which do not exist – for their political concerns at the next quadrennial kabuki dance.

Rinse and repeat…every four years.

“Divide, Destroy, then Cobble Together” trails only the National Football League in popularity, and is now so lucrative that partisan “journalists” enjoy a celebrity that eluded the Walter Cronkites and David Brinkleys, who earned respect by their unbiased – or at least less biased – reporting. It created television networks of highly paid talking heads, possessed of little to no journalistic ability or integrity, building their following and influence through with bias and air time. They, along with officeholders, candidates, and party officials work together to keep the nation divided and controlled by “conventional political wisdom”.

Consequently, parties and voters never quite align, making for increasingly dysfunctional federal governance. This creates greater political volatility, giving the talking heads more items about which to craft and apply their (in-) famous “talking points”. Government grows, individual liberties shrink, and almost everyone who helps Divide the nation, Destroy the nation, and then Cobble Together enough of the nation for an another round of division and destruction, manages to get paid.

Then the ground shifted. It began after the 2008 election.

A nation at war saw too little return on more than 7 years of blood and treasure invested abroad. Fiscal responsibility gave way to deficits, the resumption of unsustainable debt growth, and an economy in acute distress. Jobs were lost, homes foreclosed upon, and moneyed institutions that mismanaged funds received billions from the federal treasury. The nation needed a change.

And “Change” was promised, using the “Divide, Destroy, then Cobble Together” strategy. An unknown candidate told voters what they wanted to hear and, protectively cloaked in the historical significance of skin color, rode into the White House. Yet, this time, this president could not Cobble Together enough goodwill to compensate for the lies he did, and would, tell an already divided nation.

In its first midterm electoral opportunity, voters removed the president’s party from the majority in the House of Representatives, seeking balance. But the new majority were no more truthful than the president voters elected them to oppose; they failed to do the voters’ will. Then, in the next presidential election, “Divide, Destroy, then Cobble Together” gave voters a presidential challenger who varied from the distrusted president in little more than complexion; it failed to produce a distinction between presidential candidates that voters saw as a difference.

In the 2014 midterm election, despite the president successfully blaming his opposition for a government shutdown a year earlier, voters gave his opposition its largest House majority since the 1920’s and a Senate majority. Still, federal governance did not change. In fact, the more numerous the voters made the president’s opposition, the less they actually opposed the president. Another “change” was needed; GOP voters had exposed, and begun to reject, the “Divide, Destroy, then Cobble Together” strategy.

So, enter a man who fancied himself presidential material for decades and who, in 2011, polled ahead of the eventual 2012 GOP nominee, to seek a major party nomination. The practitioners and protectors of “Divide, Destroy, then Cobble Together” were incredulous. Among their assertions:

    • Trump won’t run,
    • Trump will drop out,
    • Trump can only get 35% of the vote, and
    • Trump can’t win the GOP nomination.

They were incorrect, and not just about the GOP race.

Before the Democrat primaries started, most gave socialist Bernie Sanders no chance to win Democrat nomination. Yet he’s won 19 of 45 primary contests, including 9 of the last 14. Now, the pundits appear befuddled about Sanders, as many Democrats reject Hillary Clinton; Democrat voters also exposed and rejected the “Divide, Destroy, then Cobble Together” strategy.

So, what took the finger of parties and pundits off the electorate’s pulse? Simply put, voters have a different heartbeat now, and stopped accepting the candidates that parties and pundits pushed upon them. So, a longtime Democrat party member cannot easily defeat a non-Democrat, and GOP voters reject GOP 8 governors (3 current), and GOP 5 Senators (4 current) to favor a real estate developer who’s never held public office. And the change impacts more than the current nominating campaign.

Since 2009, Democrats have hemorrhaged officeholders, at the federal (net 69 House, and 13 Senate, seats lost) and state (net 9 governor’s mansions lost, net 900+ state legislative seats, and 28 legislative majorities lost) levels. The nation is purging Democrats from power, and the party’s national footprint is shrinking.

Republicans undergo a different purge – a forced leadership change. Eric Cantor became the first sitting House Majority leader to lose a primary election; John Boehner the first House Speaker to resign because his party preferred him gone. Now Boehner’s successor wears the “sellout” label for his stances on immigration, trade, and the recent budget. He opposes voters, and an increasing number of party officeholders, by not supporting Trump, even as he faces a primary challenge at home. Ryan could go the way of Cantor.

Voter rejection of “Divide, Destroy, then Cobble Together” challenges both parties. Democrats face an existential threat; they must stop the bleeding. In addition to the Obama era losses, Democrats are switching parties during the primaries: 20,000 in Massachusetts, 60,000 in Virginia, smaller numbers in other states, and 1 in 5 Democrats say they would vote Trump in November. If they cannot revise their message, and especially if they fail in November, they risk marginalization and political insignificance.

The Republican challenge is simpler: they must either find the courage to complete their ideological purge, or yield to being a right-leaning national party with left-leaning D.C. leaders. If the leadership purge fails, the party will splinter, with each faction having less influence during the turmoil of transition.

However, should voters recognize how supportive the current major political parties are of the corruption that is the current federal government, they may decide not to take on party challenges, and instead #AlterOrAbolish the monster that resides on the Potomac River.

It’s Not About Trump; Their Issue is with YOU!

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments: 2 Comments
Published on: March 6, 2016

My “pen” is largely silent during the 2016 presidential campaign and I would prefer it remain so; few things distract more from, while doing less to meet, this nation’s challenges than the two-year kabuki dance of those seeking the presidency. However, something so brazenly foul now occurs that it compels me to comment.

Donald Trump’s tour de force, seeking a major presidential party nomination, is shocking…to everyone except Trump. When he opted out of the 2012 campaign, Trump declared:

    This decision does not come easily or without regret; especially when my potential candidacy continues to be validated by ranking at the top of the Republican contenders in polls across the country.

    I maintain the strong conviction that if I were to run, I would be able to win the primary and, ultimately, the general election. I have spent the past several months unofficially campaigning and recognize that running for public office cannot be done half-heartedly. Ultimately, however, business is my greatest passion and I am not ready to leave the private sector.

Five years later, Trump looks prophetic, as he closes on the Republican Party Presidential Nomination. He also looks every bit the target, as the number, and intensity, of his critics mount, even as he succeeds.

This is no reference to Trump’s critics within the electorate; every presidential candidate has “enemy” voters. But Trump’s most ardent enemies are neither Republican voters nor Democrat…anyone. Rather, they are Republican elected officials and operatives who attack him publicly, personally, relentlessly, and almost as a matter of party honor. Some declare that a Trump presidency would destroy the party, and one of Trump’s rivals (at least temporarily) abandoned his effort either to win the nomination or to have a national political future by transforming his campaign into a kamikaze mission against the Donald.

However, even as some GOP’ers call for “All Hands on Deck” against Trump”, he is likely not their target at all…

For this differs from earlier “stop the outsider” efforts. Democrats acquiesced and welcomed “outsider” Jimmy Carter into their national fold – after determining no one could beat him – in 1976; Republicans similarly warmed to Ronald Reagan’s “inevitability”, four years later. However, resistance to Trump increases the closer he comes to the nomination, with major players openly declaring non-support of the party should Trump prevail.

The GOP has used their vaunted “deep bench” of “establishment-friendly” candidates, not as attackers of the opposition party, but as damsels tied to the tracks, hoping to derail the Trump Train. One should wonder why the GOP spends more time trying to change the mind of its base, than it spends countering the Democrat message.

And wonder also whose drug-induced state concocted this…

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IVbBoFVWms[/youtube]

Romney’s curious “address” – neither to announce his own candidacy nor supporting another’s – is part of an anti-Trump effort that includes plans to block any Trump nomination at the party’s convention. Interestingly, John McCain is in on the plot, declaring Trump unfit for the presidency… And those who doubt the GOP establishment’s hand in this likely still believe they can keep their preferred health plan and doctor. Again, one should wonder why.

Those willing to consider more than the current election cycle may recognize that these recent antics are part of Republican Party behavior that, for (at least) the last 7 years, demonstrates, strikingly, the party’s disdainful view of, and resultant estrangement from, those who support its stated principles. Consider the following:

    • Why are the men who lost the last two general elections now experts on picking the party nominee; can anyone identify the national constituencies of either Romney or McCain? Romney lost a winnable election in 2012, and McCain was so battered in 2008 that Obama took care to rub McCain’s face in the dung of that defeat two years later:

    [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXudI0ibo-k[/youtube]

    Romney’s Trump attack echoes Democrat Party attacks on Romney from four years ago, and Romney’s 2016 Trump condemnation is a 180° departure from his praise of the Donald in 2012:

    [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlD4hwzGhdY[/youtube]

    Though the nation rejected these men, who kept the GOP from occupying the White House, the GOP welcomes, even encourages, their denigration of their current front-runner. Curious indeed.

    • Marco Rubio’s only primary win occurred in liberal Minnesota; he appears unlikely to win the March 15 primary in his home state of Florida. Yet, the party supports him, though voters snubbed him in 24 of 25 contests. Again, curious indeed.

    • And when Super Tuesday exit polling showed Trump the victor but not the desired nominee, the party did not challenge that cognitive dissonance by reminding the press, and others, that 9 of the 11 Super Tuesday states held open primaries in which non-Republicans could vote, that Democrats encouraged their members to take part in Republican primaries?

    The party did not challenge characterizations of those exit polls as voter discontent, even as Republican voter turnout hit record levels, with high enthusiasm, as even more disrespectful of their voters than of their candidate field…because they are not willing to defend their voters…

Because the party is unhappy with them.

They are unhappy that voters, beginning with the 2010 election and in response to the Obama agenda, sent conservatives to Congress; that these conservatives are not “go along to get along” people and proved so unwilling to put party before principle that it drove John Boehner into retirement. They are unhappy that Virginia voters made Eric Cantor the first sitting House Majority Leader to ever lose a primary election. Unhappy that Kevin McCarthy’s tacit admission that establishment Republicans valued the Benghazi hearings more as a way to damage Hillary Clinton’s poll numbers than to show the truth about why four Americans died, ostensibly cost him the Speakership.

Washington, D.C. establishment Republicans are losing control of their voters, and they are unhappy about that. Unhappy about a trend, since the 2010 midterm elections, that sees voters increasingly imposing their will upon the politicians’ best-laid plans. Against this backdrop, Trump is not a problem for the GOP as much as he is symptomatic of the voter problem they already have.

Consequently, stopping Trump is not about Trump at all; it is about regaining control of their constituency – YOU. A constituency at odds with them over Obamacare, joblessness, illegal immigration, the homosexual agenda, taxes, and deficits/debt; a constituency that is close to recalling that D.C. has no power save that which they authorize. A constituency that has already felled trees within the establishment, and which must be corralled before they clear more dead wood from the nation’s capitol.

D.C. Republicans cannot regain voter control without a presidential candidate that the party establishment can control (this is why they find Rubio appealing). Trump owes them nothing and needs nothing from them; he is, inarguably, not a man given to another’s control. Should he partner with an increasingly uncontrolled voter base, then everything establishment Republicans have built for themselves, via the federal government, is at risk.

By the way, Democrats do not rest easy about the GOP turmoil. Non D.C. Republicans currently occupy 31 of the nation’s 50 governor’s mansions, and control 67 of its 99 state legislative bodies, both significant increases since Obama’s 2009 inauguration. If the D.C. Republicans cannot get their constituents back in line, and Democrat voters tire of seeing neither their party nor their views represented, then the elephants trumpeting against left-leaning D.C. Republicans will seem mild, compared to the mule kick the left could receive from disgruntled Democrats.

Regarding New York Values

by Black Man Thinkin'
Categories: ... 'bout Politics
Tags: , , , , ,
Comments: 1 Comment
Published on: January 17, 2016

My late father was born and raised in New York City…

Over the course of 79 years, he became a military man, the husband of one woman for more than half a century, a baptized Catholic, the father of 3 and grandfather of 5, a decorated war veteran, a Southerner…and someone who, by choice, never again dwelled in New York City.

That is not to say that New York ever stopped being “home” to him. During my childhood, my parents would take us on alternating summer vacations; one year we would drive to New York and visit with my father’s family, and the next year we would drive to Oklahoma City for the Overton Family Reunion with my mother’s people.

I was always more excited to go to New York, and not because I liked my father’s family more. I could feel something different “in the air” every time we arrived, crossing the George Washington Bridge and traveling through the Lincoln Tunnel. The energy of that place is different, palpably so.

As I grew older, I adopted my father’s view; I remain fond of New York City, but I’ve not set foot there in nearly three decades. My father had New York values, for good or ill, and I imagine he might have been somewhat conflicted by this exchange from the last Republican presidential debate:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u44UqeUBphY[/youtube]

The conflict would not have been whether my father knew what those values were, as Senator Cruz indicated to a current New Yorker that she may not. Nor would it have involved Donald Trump’s defense of New Yorkers; my father would have concurred. The conflict would be between the values his hometown gave him, and the values it now makes most apparent to the world.

For Senator Cruz is correct: New York City is a “haven” for liberal elitists, who support abortion and homosexuality, who oppose individual gun ownership and the open practice of Christianity any place other than in churches, and anytime other than Sundays…and who see their values differently than other Americans see them. New York City conservatives, those that remain, hardly rule that roost and, judging by the 1999 interview Trump gave to Tim Russert, are more than a little bit influenced by the city’s predominant liberalism:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHAHKGP10yc[/youtube]

Stauncher conservatives may conclude that New York City is simply a nice place to be FROM.

Cruz is also correct in saying the Empire State has many good people who do not share liberal political values, but are no less governed by the liberals in Lower Manhattan, and in Albany. Unsurprisingly, those representing the city felt it appropriate to hit back at Senator Cruz, either indicating how its residents unite in taking offense at his remarks, or responding in more typical New York fashion…

For his part, Trump said some things that were true, and some things that only seem true, when speaking of New York’s response to the World Trade Center’s destruction.

Without controversy, they city’s response was amazing for its valor, its compassion, its demonstration of an indomitable spirit. It was indeed unique because of the city’s makeup, including the fact that only New York City HAD the World Trade Center, and the other resources that it could bring to bear because of its wealth, the size of its population, the fact it is a port city, etc. However, the basis of that response has nothing to do with the CITY’s values…

On a small island in Upper New York Bay in the Port of New York and New Jersey, a plaque, whose image appears below, resides on the inner wall of the Statue of Liberty’s pedestal:

null

Lady Liberty’s worldwide welcome, is to those coming to America, not simply to New York City. Given that an estimated 40% of Americans can trace their ancestry to someone who came through Ellis Island, neither all of the “huddled masses” nor all of their values remained in the Five Boroughs. The same bravery and resolve in the face of danger and uncertainty, the same compassion for the endangered neighbor and stranger alike, the same readiness to rebuild what others destroyed resides in every corner of the nation.

Consequently, those were not New York values shown on and after 9/11; those were AMERICAN values, albeit with a New York City accent. The same values were simultaneously on display at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and even more brilliantly displayed by those on Flight 93, who forced their hijacked airliner down in a field in Pennsylvania rather than allow themselves to be passengers on a death ride for other Americans.

I daresay that no matter what location in America had been attacked that day, the response would have been the same, according to American values in times of duress:

    • Run to the battle,
    • Help the hurting or the stumbled,
    • Sacrifice and not let others fall or leave the fallen behind,
    • Stop the attack, punish the attacker, and
    • Rebuild what was destroyed.

So far, those with a disdain for liberty have managed only to thinly cover those values with a politically correct veneer. When anyone cuts through that veneer, and especially when that cut draws blood from their fellow citizens, Americans remain willing to address the situation, those affected, and also those who caused harm, according to American values. But those values are being undermined…by the influence of government that is increasingly liberal/progressive…and that works to repair and thicken the veneer, so future cuts are less likely to yield an American values response.

When an illegal alien – with seven felony convictions and who had been deported five times previously – killed Kathryn Steinle in San Francisco, using a gun (indirectly) supplied by the federal government, both the federal government and the criminal justice system acted contrary to American values. American values would do more to keep a foreign felon off the streets in this country. American values, upon discovering such a man, would act against him sooner, even dismantling the “sanctuary city” laws that allow American citizens to become prey. But American government values differ from those of the American people, whether through incompetence or through intent.

It is similar for the inner cities, where people of color die violently at rates normally reserved for combat zones. The same government “involvement” that frustrated American values by protecting and enabling Steinle’s killer, does more to maintain deadly environments in American cities than allow what is necessary to create more tolerable communities. Again, the government’s values differ from those of the people, and cover the people’s values so that only extreme and acute adversity might bring those values to the fore. Strangely, the carnage in Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, Washington, D.C., and elsewhere fail to move the American people to action. While some consider it a race issue, it likely has more to do with elected officials telling everyone that they will – and that only they can – address it, and convincing killer and victim alike that their help should come from one or more government programs…

My father lived by his New York values – or rather the American values he learned growing up in New York City. He knew who he was, knew what his values were; no one could redefine them for him, tell him he did not understand them, or offer a defense of them to benefit a political agenda.

Unfortunately, there are a decreasing number of New Yorkers, or Americans, like my father…and an increasing number prepared to line up and vote for a government whose values increasingly differ from their own, no matter from where they hail, and who is very much interested in telling Americans what their values are.

«page 1 of 9

The World of Black Man Thinkin’
ARTICLE ARCHIVES
WDFP Radio Show Archives

Recent Posts
  • All Americans Should Despis… by Black Man Thinkin'

    The Hypocritical Hashtag continues to ride police brutality lies toward an anarchy destination intended to diminish all in America. They taunt toward widespread armed conflict, and Americans will have to fight them – one way or another – to end the current tensions. No “diplomatic solutions” exist that would allow the republic to continue. I’ll[…]

  • Protect the Consequences of… by Black Man Thinkin'

    Busting the current police brutality myth, which beget the accompanying #DefundThePolice insanity, hinges upon the answers to these question: Is it a societal imperative to arrest those accused of violating the law, so that they might answer allegations made against them? Do those who frustrate that imperative commit a separate offense that society allows is[…]

  • Might COVID-19 Rescue Atlan… by Black Man Thinkin'

    After Independence Weekend 2020, Atlanta is clearly a more dangerous place because of the reckless progressivism of Keisha Lance Bottoms, another in the line of liberal U.S. black females who use elected office to compromise public safety for the sake of their ideology. You might recall how Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake had police stand down to[…]

  • But You Say, “It̵… by Black Man Thinkin'

    “It is enough that the people know there were deaths. The people who die determine nothing. The people who say how they died determine everything.”

  • Watching Melanin Fall… by Black Man Thinkin'

    To the extent this is credible – Oh, how the American black mind calcifies! Blacks are pessimistic about, and choose to consider racist, an elected official who’s presided over: The lowest level of black unemployment ever recorded, Collaboration with a black Senator and a black entertainer’s spouse to advocate for and enact criminal justice reform,[…]

  • America Finally Won An Election by Black Man Thinkin'

    [youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdoLcdMJBUY[/youtube] The nation was told not to expect this. From the moment Americans found a 2016 presidential candidate through whom they could speak, they were called racist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, misogynistic, or all of the above… Oh, you thought those were representations of Donald Trump? You poor soul. Virtually every event, good or bad, of Trump’s[…]

  • Need to Drain the “Ch… by Black Man Thinkin'

    It is possible that the “No Christian should vote” movement, regarding either major party candidate in 2016 is primarily a social media phenomenon However, I have reviewed enough articles and had enough personal conversations to doubt that. It is almost certain that anyone with even a remote church affiliation has heard the “ain’t neither of[…]

  • And Then There Was…A … by Black Man Thinkin'

    A picture of America’s modern presidential campaign model. Candidates seek to: • Segment the electorate into as many groups as practical, particularly at the state level, • Empathize with sympathetic groups to create the illusion of a supportive coalition, • Ignore conflicting interests within their coalition, speaking only of common goals, • Hurry to the[…]

  • It’s Not About Trump;… by Black Man Thinkin'

    My “pen” is largely silent during the 2016 presidential campaign and I would prefer it remain so; few things distract more from, while doing less to meet, this nation’s challenges than the two-year kabuki dance of those seeking the presidency. However, something so brazenly foul now occurs that it compels me to comment. Donald Trump’s[…]

  • Regarding New York Values by Black Man Thinkin'

    My late father was born and raised in New York City… Over the course of 79 years, he became a military man, the husband of one woman for more than half a century, a baptized Catholic, the father of 3 and grandfather of 5, a decorated war veteran, a Southerner…and someone who, by choice, never[…]

Categories
Recent Comments
Welcome , today is Saturday, December 21, 2024